European Union

Beef prices are soaring in China. Across the Pacific Ocean in the United States, cattle farmers are complaining that their businesses are becoming increasingly unsustainable. And in India, poultry rearers are slashing their production targets because they cannot afford feed.

More than 90 percent of the world’s population eats meat in one form or another — and a looming meat crisis threatens to affect what they buy at the market, what they cook at home, and what’s served on the table.

At the heart of this is a chain of decisions and uncertainties that consumers rarely see. A cow has to be raised for years before it can become beef. Chickens need feed, much of it tied to global grain and soya bean markets. Farmers need land, water and weather conditions that allow them to keep animals alive and productive.

When any link in this chain is disrupted, a spiralling crisis ensues.

So what is putting the pressure on meat production, and what does it mean for billions of people around the world?

Declining cattle stocks in Brazil, US and China

Brazil, the US and China are the world’s three biggest beef producers, together supplying more than half of the world’s beef. But their cattle herds are shrinking at the same time.

According to a March estimate by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Brazil’s total herd this year is estimated at 177.4 million cattle — a nearly 8 percent drop from 192.5 million in 2024.

Over in the US, cattle numbers are at a historic low.

The USDA counted 86.2 million cattle and calves on farms on January 1, 2026. The number of beef cows — the females needed to produce future calves — was 27.6 million, down 1 percent from a year earlier. The 2025 calf crop was also down 2 percent.

In China, the USDA estimated a cattle head count of 94 million in January 2026, down 14 percent from 105 million in January 2024.

In all three cases, beef production is also projected to be down in 2026.

The USDA predicts a 2 percent decline in Brazil’s beef production and a 5 percent fall in exports. As for the US, beef production in 2026 is likely to be 4 percent lower than last year. China’s total beef supply this year is projected to be 12 percent lower than 2024.

The decline in domestic production, coupled with shrinking supplies that can be imported, has sent prices soaring in China — the world’s largest beef consumer and importer.

What’s driving down cattle herds and beef production?

The reasons are many, and they vary from country to country.

Brazil counts China and the European Union as two major markets for its beef exports. But both have imposed import restrictions that have disincentivised Brazilian beef manufacturers. That is partly responsible for the country’s decreased cattle head count, according to an analysis by Augusto Neto at S&P Global, the market intelligence firm.

Additionally, Brazil is currently in what is known as a cattle reversion cycle — when rearers reduce the slaughter of animals and instead try to preserve their female stock to help rebuild their herd — according to the USDA.

In the US, droughts have hit 60 percent of the country’s cattle-rearing area, according to a report by Sampad Nandy of S&P Global. With grazing areas decreasing, feed costs have risen.

Three major organisations, representing breeders in the states of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, issued a joint statement this week arguing that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids were disrupting their already strained operations. The meat industry depends heavily on immigrant workers.

If beef prices are rising, shouldn’t rearers want to produce more beef?

In theory, yes. But in practice, high prices do not automatically mean that more cattle can be produced quickly.

Cattle production is constrained by biological supply cycles, Kenneth Foster, professor of agricultural economics at Purdue University, told Al Jazeera. It can take a couple of years for a producer who receives a signal from the market to expand production and actually see the resulting animals enter the beef supply. The quickest way to rebuild a herd is to keep female cattle that might otherwise have been sold and use them for breeding. That is what Brazil is now doing.

But that creates a difficult economic calculation. A producer can sell an animal today at a high price, or keep it for breeding and wait for the next generation. That means carrying the costs and risks of keeping the animal while waiting for it to reproduce.

The result is a market in which strong demand and limited supply can persist even when prices are already high.

The USDA expects the cattle herd to begin rebuilding in the US, but the process is gradual.

The US and Brazil cases illustrate one of the central problems facing meat production: sometimes the constraint is not technology, land or money.

It is time.

Europe’s move from beef to poultry

Meanwhile, Europe presents a different picture. The continent is witnessing a structural change in what consumers are eating.

The EU produced about 42.7 million tonnes of meat in 2025. But EU meat production is projected to decline by about 3 percent between 2025 and 2035, with beef production projected to fall by 10 percent and pork by 7 percent. Poultry is the exception: production is projected to rise by 5 percent.

This shift is also visible in consumption.

Consumption of EU beef and pigmeat is projected to decline through 2035, while poultry consumption is expected to increase by 9 percent.

Beef and pork require longer production cycles and face different economic and environmental pressures. Poultry, by contrast, can respond much more quickly to changes in demand because chickens reach market weight within weeks rather than years.

That difference is becoming increasingly important. The OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook expects poultry to be the fastest-growing major meat category globally over the next decade, helped by its relatively low cost and short production cycle.

Europe is therefore becoming an example of how a meat system can adapt without simply producing more of everything. Some forms of meat become harder or more expensive to produce, while others expand to fill part of the space.

Poultry has problems too — as India shows

Yet the poultry industry faces its own challenges, with India offering an example.

In June, a large section of India’s poultry industry announced plans to cut production by 25 percent after soya meal prices rose by more than 40 percent in a month.

The decision was announced by the All India Poultry Breeders’ Association after producers faced sharply higher feed costs and a seasonal decline in demand. Producers also began culling parent breeder stocks — birds needed to produce future generations of poultry.

Soya meal is an important protein source in animal feed. When its price rises sharply, poultry producers face a choice: absorb higher costs, raise prices, or reduce the number of birds they produce.

In India’s case, producers chose to cut production.

The consequences extended beyond individual farms. The Reuters news agency reported in May that Indian soya meal prices had risen 41 percent in one month to a four-year high of 66,000 rupees ($687.5) per tonne. India subsequently cancelled 25,000 tonnes of soya meal export contracts and began turning to soya bean imports from African countries.

The takeaway: a shock in one part of the agricultural system can move quickly through the meat supply chain globally.

As farmers try to protect their livelihoods and families try to keep food on the table, changing climates, rising prices, shifting dietary preferences and growing trade barriers are together reshaping the future of meat — and what we eat.

The move comes after the EU lifts sanctions on oligarchs following what diplomats described as pressure from Baku.

Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev has pardoned Martin Ryan, a French national who was serving a 10-year prison sentence on spying charges.

The move on Wednesday came a day after the European Union lifted sanctions on Russian billionaire Alisher Usmanov following what diplomats described as pressure exerted by Baku.

Ryan, who was arrested in 2023 and sentenced in March, was among 20 people pardoned by Aliyev’s office, alongside Azerbaijani, Turkish, Russian-Israeli and Pakistani nationals, Reuters news agency reported.

Aliyev’s website said the president took into account their “personalities, state of health, family circumstances” and other reasons in deciding to grant pardons.

France welcomed “with relief the decision to grant clemency” to Ryan, calling it “a humanitarian gesture”, according to a French Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement. “This decision is the result of patient and exacting dialogue with the Azerbaijani authorities.”

It remained unclear whether Ryan had been released.

Spying charges

Prosecutors alleged Ryan gathered information on Azerbaijan’s military ties with Turkiye, Iran and Pakistan, as well as on companies linked to Russia and China.

Ryan, who also holds British citizenship, denied the charges. France said the allegations against him were false and had called for his immediate release, arguing he had been caught in the crossfire of diplomatic tensions.

The delisting of Usmanov ⁠and fellow Russian billionaire Mikhail Fridman was the first time the EU removed sanctions on the wealthiest members of Russia’s billionaire elite who had not publicly condemned the war on Ukraine.

Usmanov, who once held a minority stake ⁠in Arsenal football club, graduated from the same prestigious diplomatic school in Moscow as the presidents of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan and knows them personally.

Diplomatic response

European diplomats told Reuters and AFP news agencies that France had privately indicated Baku was using Usmanov’s sanctions status to pressure Paris over its detained citizens.

A second Frenchman, Anass Derraz, an employee of the French water company Saur who was sentenced to 12 years on corruption charges, was not included in the pardons.

An Azerbaijani diplomat rejected suggestions of a pressure campaign as “categorically unfounded”.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the move reflected Russian efforts “to break the West’s unity”, while his Foreign Minister, Andrii Sybiha, said Moscow was “celebrating, because it got what it wanted: a sense of impunity, the humiliation of the EU, and division among Europeans”.

Latvia abstained from the vote and said it would impose its own sanctions on the two men, with Foreign Minister Baiba Braze calling the EU decision “dangerous”.

Slovakia initially called for Usmanov’s removal, with France later backing the move.

Relations between Baku and Paris have long been strained by France’s support for Armenia, even as ties between Moscow and Baku have also deteriorated since the accidental downing of an Azerbaijani passenger jet by Russian forces in December 2024.

Britain is seeking a closer economic relationship with the European Union by asking to participate in the bloc’s “Made in Europe” industrial strategy, as Prime Minister Andy Burnham argues that the UK and EU face many of the same economic and industrial challenges.

Travelling to New York for his first United Nations General Assembly as prime minister, Burnham said Britain would seek to become a “trusted partner” in the initiative, which is intended to strengthen European production and reduce dependence on Chinese components.

“Europe’s argument is not with us,” Burnham told reporters on Monday. He said Britain and the EU faced similar pressures, particularly in industries such as steel, and argued that the UK should not face unintended consequences from a policy aimed at addressing dependence on China.

The British government has warned that excluding UK companies could disrupt established supply chains and create additional trade barriers between Britain and EU member states.

Why Britain wants access

The EU’s Made in Europe initiative is part of a broader effort to increase domestic industrial capacity and reduce reliance on overseas supply chains, particularly those involving China.

For Britain, exclusion could have consequences for sectors that remain closely integrated with European markets. The automotive industry, for example, relies on supply chains that cross the English Channel in both directions. Industry representatives have warned that excluding British manufacturers from European incentives and procurement opportunities could affect the competitiveness of both British and European companies.

British officials therefore want the EU to treat the UK as a partner in the initiative rather than as an external supplier.

Burnham has argued that British participation would reflect the practical connections that remain between the UK and European economies despite Brexit.

A wider attempt to rebuild UK EU ties

The dispute over Made in Europe is taking place as Burnham’s government seeks to deepen Britain’s relationship with the EU.

The UK government has already been pursuing closer cooperation with European countries in areas including defence, technology and manufacturing. Finance Minister John Healey recently urged EU counterparts not to exclude Britain from the bloc’s industrial strategy.

The government has also been seeking greater cooperation on European security. However, negotiations over British participation in the EU’s SAFE defence fund broke down, creating another obstacle to the government’s efforts to expand cooperation with Brussels.

Burnham has said he wants to move further and faster in rebuilding ties with the EU. His government has also been working toward a UK EU summit that was delayed following the change in prime minister.

The challenge inside Europe

Britain’s request for access is not simply a matter of negotiating with EU institutions. Member states also have different interests in how far the bloc’s industrial policies should extend to non member countries.

The proposed policy is intended to direct European economic activity toward European production and strengthen industrial resilience. Extending its benefits to British companies could therefore raise questions about what obligations Britain would have in return and how EU based businesses would compete with UK firms.

There are also broader questions about the meaning of the UK’s post Brexit relationship with the bloc. The British government is seeking closer economic and security cooperation without reversing the country’s decision to leave the EU.

That creates a difficult balance. London wants greater access to European programmes and markets, while Brussels must determine the conditions under which a non member state can participate in policies designed partly to strengthen the EU’s own industrial base.

What comes next?

Burnham’s immediate objective is to secure British participation in the Made in Europe framework while avoiding new barriers for industries whose supply chains remain closely connected to the continent.

The issue could become part of wider negotiations over the future of UK EU relations. Burnham has said his focus is on a renewed summit with European leaders, which he hopes can take place before the end of the year.

The outcome will indicate how far Britain and the EU can move toward closer economic cooperation without reopening the fundamental question of Britain’s membership.

For London, the argument is that Britain and Europe face shared challenges from global supply chain disruption and dependence on foreign production. For the EU, the question is how to strengthen European industrial capacity while determining the appropriate role for a neighbouring non member economy.

The debate over Made in Europe therefore reflects a broader post Brexit question: how closely can Britain integrate with European economic and security structures while remaining outside the bloc?

With information from Reuters.

A day after unveiling Pontes, its system for settling tokenised assets in central bank money, the ECB has set out how it wants Europe’s crypto rulebook rewritten.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The response, published on Tuesday by the European System of Central Banks, which groups the ECB with the EU’s national central banks, argues for tougher rules on stablecoins, staking and crypto firms.

It feeds into the European Commission’s review of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, known as MiCA, the EU’s rulebook for cryptocurrencies and the firms that trade them.

MiCA has applied since December 2024, and the last transitional deadline for existing operators expired on 1 July, including Binance, the world’s largest exchange, to stop serving European customers.

The Commission’s consultation will close on 30 September, a month later than planned.

The central banks’ recommendations are not binding, and the Commission will weigh them alongside other responses before deciding whether to reopen the law.

EU diplomats have told Euronews they expect a revision in 2027, which would need the approval of the European Parliament and member states.

No interest and no loopholes

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to hold a steady value, usually by tracking the US dollar.

MiCA already bars both issuers and crypto exchanges from paying interest on them, and the central banks want it kept that way.

“The payment of stablecoin remuneration should continue to be prohibited,” the ECB response says.

Their targets are the workarounds. Some exchanges, the response notes, offer crypto lending, borrowing and staking, “thereby replicating the economic effect of interest payments through ancillary or unregulated services.”

The central banks want the ban extended to those activities and to indirect rewards, such as certain loyalty-programme benefits, calling it “a clear legislative priority”.

Washington has gone the other way.

The 2025 GENIUS Act banned US stablecoin issuers from paying interest but left exchanges free to offer rewards, and whether to close that gap became one of the most contested fights over the CLARITY Act, the landmark crypto bill that fell ten votes short in the US Senate on 15 September.

A brake on US dollar stablecoins

The central banks want stronger tools against tokens pegged to foreign currencies.

It would be useful, they say, if authorities could impose “a prohibition to issue new tokens, as well as an obligation to redeem existing tokens” on issuers where central banks judge that the tokens pose a threat, including to financial stability.

More broadly, they see limited benefit in stablecoins for everyday payments at home, given instant bank transfers and the planned digital euro. They warn that MiCA provides no legal basis for issuing the same stablecoin both inside and outside the EU.

In a bank run, European reserves could end up paying holders elsewhere, while “EU authorities cannot determine with certainty how many tokens are held within the Union.”

Eurozone central banks also do not currently let stablecoin issuers hold customer funds with them.

A token fully backed by central bank money, the response warns, “would effectively result in a ‘synthetic’ central bank digital currency” that is essentially a private imitation of the digital euro and could, in theory, drain deposits from commercial banks, especially under stress.

Staking and decentralised finance

On staking, where users lock up crypto in exchange for rewards, the response is blunt: “Staking, lending and borrowing of crypto-assets should be regulated at Union level.”

Where a firm takes customers’ crypto and promises to return it, potentially with a premium, the central banks argue that the arrangement can be “comparable to the taking of repayable funds”, in the language of banking.

The same applies to decentralised finance, or DeFi, where lending and trading run on automated software rather than through a company.

MiCA exempts fully decentralised services but never defines the term, and the central banks cite studies showing that full decentralisation is rarely, if ever, achieved, leaving it unclear who is in control.

Who licenses crypto exchanges?

The central banks also back a Commission proposal to move licensing and supervision of crypto firms from national regulators to ESMA, the EU’s markets watchdog.

Currently, one national licence covers the whole bloc, which was the route Binance originally pursued in Greece.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week, citing people familiar with the discussions, that ECB President Christine Lagarde urged Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis not to approve Binance’s application because of the exchange’s past compliance problems and fears that its scale could deepen the use of US dollar stablecoins in Europe.

A senior Greek regulator, according to the newspaper, told the exchange that Lagarde wanted the decision delayed until ESMA took over, the same shift the central banks endorse in Tuesday’s response. Binance withdrew the application on 24 June.

Neither the ECB nor the Greek regulator has confirmed the account. The ECB, which has no formal role in licensing crypto firms, declined to comment, while Binance said it would “not comment on speculation”.

A WOMAN from the UK was stopped at the border abroad after she was told she had overstayed in Europe – despite her not.

Paula Pugh was going on holiday to Italy but was taken back to the UK after systems showed she had overstayed her limit of 90 days in a 180-day period in the Schengen Area.

EES has been causing chaos for lots of Brits since it was first introduced earlier this year including airport delays and missed flights,

But now, it is also causing problems for passengers by incorrectly claiming they are staying too long in Europe.

Talking to The Telegraph, Paula Pugh, 60, explained how she was escorted out of Italy and taken back to the UK because of the error.

Travelling with her husband and cousin for a five-day trip to southern Italy, Paula was flagged at border control shortly after landing.

ROME FREE

Ten cheap autumn city breaks from £59pp with £1.40 pints, 28C & thermal spas

DIVE IN

Rainproof UK autumn holiday parks from £8pp a night – Center Parcs dupes and more

She was accused of overstaying her 90 limit in the Schengen Area despite taking just three short visits to Spain and one to France – which totted up to 22 days.

Talking to the publication Paula explained she “wasn’t allowed to go anywhere without a police presence.”

Paula was put on a flight home on the same day from another airport with Ryanair along with her family.

Her passport was given to the captain for the duration of their flight.

She added: “My husband then asked the cabin crew where I would get my passport, and we had to walk to the front of the plane.

“Somebody came onto the plane, took me off the plane, had a look, gave me my passport, and said ‘There you go.’ As though it was all over and all forgotten.

“I’m still very upset when I think about it.”

The cancelled trip and return flights home cost the family around £2,000.

Now, Paula is trying to get her record corrected.

Previously, Brits were manually stamped in and out of a country at border control. EES has replaced that with the taking of biometrics and fingerprints.

However, in some cases where EES has been turned off at airports due to faults, or delays, the exit for Brits has not been recorded and the days spent in the Schengen Area continues without them knowing.

A UK Government spokesman told The Telegraph: “While EES is an EU scheme, we recognise this is a significant change for British travellers, and advise that they read the latest Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) Travel Advice about the scheme before travelling.“

In August, the UK Foreign Office altered its advice to Brits asking them to carry evidence of when they last left the EU, to avoid being wrongly refused entry.

Brits travelling from the UK to Europe can spend 90 days out of every 180 in the EU – staying over this limit will mean both refusal of entry and a fine.

In some cases a fine can be as much as £8,550.

Advice from the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) reads: “If you believe you have been incorrectly entered into EES or your record of time spent in the Schengen area is incorrect, approach border officials when you next cross the Schengen border and request a correction.

“If you are exempt, carry documentation confirming your status. If you believe your time spent in the Schengen area has been recorded incorrectly, raise this with border officials and be prepared to provide supporting evidence if requested.”

If you want to check the days left on your record before travelling, the The European Commission has an EES online tool.

Kremlin calls UK’s support for Ukraine an endorsement of ‘terrorism’ after recent escalation of weapons supplies.

Russia has stepped up pressure on Ukraine’s allies, summoning Britain’s top diplomat in Moscow over arms shipments to Kyiv and seizing Russian assets of several Western firms.

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Britain’s charge d’affairs, Danae Dholakia, on Friday, issuing a formal protest over the UK’s “further increase” in weapons to Ukraine.

“London is placing itself in the position of an accomplice to the bloody atrocities committed by the Kyiv regime, which can only be characterised as terrorism and war crimes,” the ministry said in a statement.

Britain has maintained its support for Ukraine and says it will stand “shoulder to shoulder” with Kyiv and will provide whatever military equipment it needs, saying just last month that it will share classified weapons information.

Moscow’s move comes the day after Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned that Russia might be preparing to launch hybrid drone and missile strikes against countries that support Ukraine, including Poland. He said that such attacks would be framed as accidental, with the intention of weakening NATO states’ resolve to invoke collective defence provisions in the event of an attack on one of its countries.

French President Emmanuel Macron said on Friday that the threat posed by Russia’s shadow operations was growing across Europe and that Moscow had targeted ⁠⁠France with hybrid attacks in the past few ⁠⁠weeks.

“The Russian hybrid threat against Europeans and against France has intensified,” he said after a meeting with French political leaders.

France’s interior minister had met regional prefects to step up “vigilance in response to the Russian hybrid attacks”, Macron said, adding that he had ordered “the government to prepare a plan to protect our critical infrastructure” and the “most sensitive” defence industry and technology sites against drone and cyber-attacks.

Moscow seizes French, Swiss firms

As Russia steps up pressure on Ukraine’s political allies, it is also targeting Western companies.

Moscow has ordered the seizure of Russian businesses and assets of Swiss food giant Nestle and three French firms: retailer Auchan, DIY chain Lemana Pro (formerly Leroy Merlin) and logistics firm FM Logistics.

President Vladimir Putin signed a decree late on Thursday that changed the firms’ Russian operations to a new entity, LEV Management, which is managed by a Russian Ministry of Interior general, according to Novaya Gazeta Europe.

Nestle said it was still “assessing” the situation and its options but it remains “committed to taking all necessary steps to protect its rights”.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Friday that one of the reasons behind the decision was because Nestle and Auchan are companies from “unfriendly” countries.

Their assets are only under “temporary administration” and that no decisions have been taken as of yet, Peskov added.

Overnight Russian strikes hit multiple regions in Ukraine, sparking several fires across the country, as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is to host the inaugural Carpathian Eight summit of several European countries.

They include Romania, Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary and Serbia, with the European Union also set to discuss regional cooperation.

Hungary and Slovakia have refused to send Kyiv direct military assistance in the past, though Poland and Romania remain staunch allies.

Warsaw also says it has scrambled military planes in response to a Russian attack in western Ukraine, close to its border.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk says that intelligence information suggests Russia plans to launch drone and missile attacks against countries supporting Ukraine.

Warsaw’s leader outlined the assessment during an address to parliament on Thursday, saying that the attacks will be meant to weaken NATO’s ability to act collectively in response.

“According to intelligence assessments, Russia’s plan … includes hybrid drone and missile strikes against countries supporting Ukraine, including Poland,” Tusk said.

European countries suspect Moscow of being behind a series of acts of sabotage in recent months to put pressure on the allies, especially Germany, helping Kyiv in its bid to resist Russia’s full-scale invasion – something the Kremlin has vigorously denied.

“These potential strikes would be quote-unquote ‘accidental’ in nature, intended to paralyse or at least weaken the resolve of NATO states to invoke the relevant NATO provisions in the event of aggression against a member country,” Tusk added.

He did not elaborate on which intelligence agencies had provided the warning.

He also said such attacks by Russia could coincide with “political changes in certain European countries granting power – or at least a powerful voice – to those who, increasingly invoking noble slogans of peace, pacifism and needless casualties, will call for peace – or rather, the total capitulation of Ukraine”.

Tusk appeared to be referring to the advance of more Russia-friendly parties such as Alternative for Germany (AfD) and National Rally in France.

Air raid near border with Poland

Earlier on Thursday, Poland said it had scrambled military planes in response to a Russian attack in western Ukraine, close to the Polish border.

Airports in Rzeszow and Lublin were temporarily closed, and residents of two eastern regions of Poland received air raid warnings. Local media reported that sirens had sounded and that pupils in some schools had sought shelter.

“Very close to the Polish border, not far from Dorohusk, a petrol station was most likely attacked again,” Tusk said.

On Sunday, a Russian drone hit a passenger train in Ukraine, just two kilometres (1.6 miles) from the Polish border.

Defence Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz said Poland was strengthening airspace protection.

“We have increased F-16 and helicopter activity, and are reinforcing our air defence and rapid response systems,” he wrote on X.

Tusk said he would visit Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday to discuss cooperation within the Integrated Anti-Ballistic Missile Coalition, a group of European countries developing an air defence system with Ukraine as a cheaper alternative to the US-built Patriot.

Public broadcaster RTE says the country’s participation cannot be justified amid ‘appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza’.

Ireland has become the second country, after the Netherlands, to announce a boycott of next year’s Eurovision Song Contest over Israel’s participation.

Irish public broadcaster RTE said in a statement on Thursday that the country’s participation could not be justified “given the appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza” and that the humanitarian crisis in the enclave “continues to put the lives of so many civilians at risk”.

RTE, which manages Ireland’s selection and participation in Eurovision, added that it remained “deeply concerned by the continued denial of independent access [for] international journalists to the territory”.

The decision marks the second consecutive year that Ireland will neither participate in nor broadcast the competition, which is the world’s most popular television music show.

Earlier this month, Eurovision organisers said they were excluding any country involved in an armed conflict from hosting the competition.

However, the Dutch public broadcaster Avrotros said the exclusion of countries in conflict was not “sufficient”.

Avrotros announced last month that it was withdrawing from the 2027 competition.

It said Eurovision could “no longer be considered neutral” given Israel’s participation in “a large-scale military conflict” in Gaza.

Both Ireland and the Netherlands were among five countries that withdrew from Eurovision 2026 in Vienna earlier this year. Spain, Slovenia and Iceland also decided not to participate.

Eurovision Director Martin Green said on Thurday that organisers “fully respect” Ireland’s decision and that they “will be missed”.

“The Eurovision Song Contest is at its best when broadcasters and their artists from different countries come together to share music, celebrate creativity and create connections between audiences,” Green said.

“That power to bring people together is at the heart of what makes the Contest so special, and is even more important now in an increasingly difficult and divided world.”

The 2026 show, which Bulgaria won, attracted 132 million viewers, 34 million fewer than its 2025 edition.

Thousands of protesters gathered outside the venue in the Austrian capital during the final in mid-May to oppose Israel’s participation.

The European Broadcasting Union organises the annual music competition. It has faced accusations of applying a double standard for refusing to exclude Israel, despite banning Russia following its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

In address to European parliament, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney listed areas where he wants to boost cooperation.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has welcomed the prospect of his country becoming the European Union’s first associate member, saying such an alliance is aimed to be a “beacon for democracies” and not to “dominate others”.

Speaking in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, Carney said Canada “welcomes” von der Leyen’s ambition to make the country an associate member.

“We are not fair-weather allies. We do not pursue zero-sum deals. We hold common values for which we have always fought, and in whose defence we must always remain vigilant,” Carney said to applause from European lawmakers.

“Canada and Europe are each strong. Europe and Canada are stronger together.”

“I am not proposing a third bloc in order to become a great-power rival – only with better manners,” he continued. “We do not seek power to dominate others. On the contrary, we are pursuing resilience so that no one can control our open markets, impair our sovereignty, threaten our territorial integrity, or undermine our freedoms, our democracies, our rule of law.”

Carney listed a slew of areas where he wanted to ramp up cooperation.

“Canada and Europe should secure our strategic autonomy through deep cooperation in the full range of strategic capabilities, including critical minerals, defence industrial capacity, AI and compute, energy security, space and payments.”

He also said the EU and Canada should move towards “seamless digital trade” and allow young people from both sides to work and study on either side of the Atlantic.

The EU and Canada have been facing stiff rivalry and pressure from Trump’s administration on trade, among other matters, and from an increasingly assertive China.

Trump threatened late on Wednesday to take action against the EU if it moves forward with von der Leyen’s proposal of associate membership for Canada.

“If they do that, if I think it’s at all a hostile act, I will put very serious tariffs or stop trading with Europe on many things,” Trump told reporters, calling the proposal “laughable”.

“If it’s a good intention, that’s fine. If it’s a bad intention, we’ll put very heavy tariffs on Europe,” he added.

The European Commission (EC) said von der Leyen’s proposal – which is yet to be fleshed out and will need to be approved by EU member states to go forward – was not a hostile act.

“As our President (von der Leyen) made clear yesterday, the proposed strengthening of our partnership with Canada is not against anyone else, but for our common strength,” said Olof Gill, an EC spokesperson.

The European Union is preparing to use a broader range of economic measures to reduce what European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen described as an unsustainable trade deficit with China.

Speaking to the European Parliament on Wednesday, von der Leyen said the imbalance had reached a critical point, with the EU running a goods trade deficit with China equivalent to around €1 billion ($1.15 billion) a day last year.

She warned that Europe was experiencing what she described as a second “China shock”, with growing Chinese industrial exports contributing to pressure on European manufacturing and raising concerns about deindustrialisation.

Europe seeks concrete results

The issue has become a priority in EU China relations as European governments seek to address the growing imbalance through negotiations as well as economic policy tools.

EU leaders asked the European Commission in June to deliver results from its dialogue with Beijing and ensure that the bloc had sufficient instruments to protect its economic interests.

European Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic, who is leading the discussions, has said he wants tangible progress by October.

Von der Leyen said cooperation remained in both sides’ interests but warned that the EU was prepared to move beyond dialogue if negotiations failed to produce results.

“We will use all the tools at our disposal to rebalance our relationship,” she said.

The approach reflects a broader European effort to reduce economic vulnerabilities without completely severing commercial ties with China, one of the EU’s most important trading partners.

Critical minerals add to concerns

Trade is not the only area creating pressure on the relationship. The EU also remains heavily dependent on China for several critical raw materials, including rare earth elements that are essential for industries such as electronics, renewable energy, defense and advanced manufacturing.

Von der Leyen said the EU needed to accelerate efforts to secure supplies and build strategic reserves.

The European Commission plans to establish a European corporation focused on critical raw materials to help the bloc secure and stockpile essential resources.

What’s next

The EU’s approach is likely to combine negotiations with measures aimed at strengthening its own industrial capacity and reducing dependence on Chinese supply chains.

For Beijing, the growing European focus on trade imbalances, industrial competition and critical minerals could create additional pressure to make concessions while preserving access to the European market.

For the EU, however, reducing the deficit will require more than trade restrictions. Europe will also need to expand domestic production, diversify suppliers and address the competitiveness challenges facing its own industries.

The October deadline for trade talks could therefore become an important test of whether Brussels and Beijing can reach practical agreements or whether the EU moves toward a more defensive economic relationship with China.

With information from Reuters.

AirBaltic, the national airline of Latvia, has filed fo Chatper 11 protection in New York. The airline currently operates direct services between London Gatwick and Riga, as well as twice-weekly seasonal Aberdeen to Riga service

AirBaltic has filed for bankruptcy, casting the airline’s future in serious doubt.

Latvia’s national airline filed for Chapter 11 protection in New York on 14 September as it seeks to restructure its debts.

AirBaltic currently operates direct services between London Gatwick and Riga, as well as twice-weekly seasonal Aberdeen to Riga service. These serve approximately 4,144 passengers each week, according to AirAdvisor.

Earlier this year, the airline announced it would launch flights from the UK to Lapland in December, offering five new routes to Kuusamo in Finnish Lapland from European airports, including services from London Gatwick and Manchester.

The airline plans to reduce its fleet from 54 aircraft to 36 by the end of 2026, while some staff members may also lose their jobs. CEO Erno Hilden has said that consultations are underway regarding workforce reductions, although no figure has been decided.

AirBaltic has faced a number of financial challenges since it took a €30 million (£26 million) state loan in April 2026, the company said in a statement, “including increased fuel costs arising from the crisis in the Middle East.”

Supervisory board chairman Andrejs Martinovs said in a written statement: “We have carefully assessed the restructuring options available to the company, with one priority in focus – to give airBaltic the best possible basis to continue operating and to build a sustainable financial structure. Under court supervision and with protection from creditor claims, this process provides a clear framework and timetable for reaching agreements with creditors, including aircraft lessors and other stakeholders. At the same time, it allows the company to continue operating.”

What does this mean for passengers?

If you have a flight booked with airBaltic, you shouldn’t panic. Passengers should not interpret the word ‘bankruptcy’ as meaning the airline has stopped flying and cancel valid bookings themselves – it has not cancelled any flights.

The airline has a commitment for €350 million (£300 million) in financing, subject to court approval, and insists that scheduled flights, bookings and customer services are continuing normally.

AirBaltic said flights would operate as scheduled during the court-supervised process, which it expects to finish by June next year.

Flights departing the UK fall under UK261. Riga to UK services are protected under EU passenger-rights rules because they depart from an EU airport. In either direction, a cancellation would normally allow passengers to choose between reimbursement and rerouting.

Anton Radchenko, Aviation Expert and CEO of AirAdvisor , said: “Chapter 11 is designed to give a company space to keep operating while it restructures, so I would not cancel a valid airBaltic booking when the airline is still flying and says the ticket remains valid. Cancelling voluntarily could leave the passenger subject to the ticket’s normal restrictions, whereas waiting for the airline’s decision preserves their statutory rights if the service is later changed or cancelled.

“I would use this moment to identify exactly what protects the booking. A direct flight is not usually ATOL protected, airline-failure insurance is not standard, and the practical fallback may depend on whether the passenger booked a genuine package, paid directly by credit card or can make a chargeback claim.

If airBaltic cancels while continuing to operate, passengers should request a refund or rerouting and the necessary care rather than accepting whichever option is presented first. Fixed compensation may also apply depending on the notice and reason, but if an airline ceases trading completely, possessing a legal claim does not guarantee immediate repayment, which is why the financial protection behind the booking matters.”

LONDON: The leaders of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland signed a pact Monday that threatens to lead to the breakup of the United Kingdom.

The first ministers of the three semiautonomous regions of the U.K. told Prime Minister Andy Burnham and his government to prepare for constitutional change and that their future lies with the European Union.

“For people watching across these islands — for people watching around the world — there could be no clearer sign that Westminster’s time is coming to an end,” they said in a memorandum of understanding, referring to Parliament.

The announcement came about 48 hours after U.S. President Donald Trump waded into the waters of the politically contentious issue when he said he would “ love to see ” a reunified Ireland during a trip to visit his golf course hosting the Irish Open.

It’s the first time the leaders of all three countries are either from pro-independence parties, or pro-unification in the case of Northern Ireland, which was partitioned and remained part of the U.K. when Ireland won independence from Britain over a century ago.

Tensions remain despite devolution of power

Burnham’s spokesperson brushed aside the threat and said the prime minister strongly believes in the union and was more focused on lowering the cost of living than dealing with constitutional debates.

“The United Kingdom is at its best when people come together around our shared values and problem-solving, rather than division,” Tom Wells said.

Nicola McEwen, director of the University of Glasgow Center for Public Policy, said the summit was symbolically important but has no legal significance.

“I don’t see the threat to the union being bigger today than it was yesterday,” McEwen said.

In the late 1990s, the U.K. passed legislative acts that decentralized government through the process of devolution, giving each country except England some level of policy independence and self-governance through their own parliaments. But tensions have remained with the U.K.-wide government in London, which retained control over national issues and those concerning England.

Scotland’s John Swinney and Northern Ireland’s Michelle O’Neill called for independence referendums in their countries, while Rhun ap Iorwerth did not provide a timetable for one in Wales.

The three leaders appeared in their political capacity, rather than their official one, possibly because O’Neill is in a power-sharing government with the Democratic Unionist Party.

Northern Ireland’s Deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly, of the DUP, accused O’Neill, of the Sinn Fein party, of “weaponizing” the role of first minister by signing the agreement.

“I am first minister in the north of Ireland,” O’Neill replied. “This is about historic change happening all around us.”

Scottish nationalists believe support for independence is rising

Scotland tried unsuccessfully to break away in 2014, with voters rejecting a referendum 55% to 45%. But McEwen said support for Scottish independence has grown since Brexit, in which the U.K. formally left the European Union in January 2020, following a referendum in June 2016.

Swinney, leader of the Scottish National Party, said he believed voters would now vote for independence if the U.K. government approved a referendum.

Burnham told Parliament last week he would allow such a vote to be held if there was a “clear consensus” in Scotland, but later sent Swinney a letter saying a vote was “off limits.”

The 1998 Good Friday peace accord that ended three decades of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland known as “The Troubles,” requires a vote on unification if polls there indicate it would likely pass, a threshold the U.K. government says has not been met. Ireland would also have to approve the change in a referendum.

Burnham has made devolution a major theme since taking office less than two months ago, but his focus has been on regional governments across England, a reflection of his years as mayor of Greater Manchester.

Swinney tried to turn Burnham’s ideology to his advantage, saying his frequent talk of devolution “leads you to the logic of recognizing the right of the people of Scotland, in my case, to decide their own future.”

Beyond any threat of departing the union, McEwen said the greatest impact of the three joining forces could be that they agreed to cooperate with each other routinely and that could help to exert more influence on the U.K. government.

“It does keep on the agenda that question about, well, if the United Kingdom is a union based on consent, what is the pathway where it looks like that consent may no longer be there?” McEwen said. “Any U.K. government has been very reluctant to engage in that discussion.”

The European Union entry-exit system (EES) has caused repeated delays for Brits at major EU airports this year

British holidaymakers heading abroad may finally be able to breathe a sigh of relief over the widely-criticised EES system. The scheme forces non-EU residents to queue at special machines in airports before gaining entry to 29 nations within the so-called Schengen area – essentially the majority of the European Union.

However, there have been persistent reports of lengthy delays – some stretching to as long as four hours. A new report in the Sunday Times now reveals that the European Union has shelved the controversial entry-exit system (EES) across at least nine countries.

Portugal, Italy, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Malta, Greece and Switzerland are all understood to have been granted permission to postpone full implementation of EES. The newspaper reports that there appears to be no deadline by which these countries must adopt the scheme, which has already sparked widespread reports of enormous queues at European airports this summer in destinations such as Mallorca, Faro, the Canary Islands and Milan.

The scheme has faced fierce criticism from Ryanair and others. The European Union describes the Entry/Exit System (EES) as an automated IT system designed to register non-EU nationals travelling on short stays each time they cross the external borders of participating European countries.

Following years of postponements, the system was rolled out from October 2025, with full implementation originally anticipated by the following April. However, faced with the prospect of significant border queues due to software failures, officials granted countries a 150-day grace period during which they could drop the checks to avoid travel chaos.

That rule ended on September 6. The EU previously insisted there would be no extension.

Yet the Sunday Times reports that at least nine Schengen countries are understood to have told the European Commission, which is responsible for overseeing the EES, that they would not enforce the new controls in full until the technology and systems were working correctly.

They have informally been allowed to do so with no time limits apparently in place to adopt the system, it is being reported. One of the main purposes of the system is to track whether non-EU citizens have spent more than their permitted 90 days in the bloc in a rolling 180-day period.

Social media has been awash with debate about the scheme. One post on Reddit saw a traveller say: “They made a mess of it. Seems many basic things like it is hit and miss on the document scanning but also things like people walk up with hats and headphones and the machine doesn’t tell them to remove them, and organisational things like if the machine errors the traveller has to back out and has no where to go.

“The right way to do this would have been progressive: start by getting some people eg 5% going through the machine lane, everyone else through normal.

“The vendor observes problems, fixes them, once machine working well, increase to 10%, then 20% and so on.” Another person said: “The general lack of functionality of so many IT systems across the EU is kind of astonishing.”

A third added: “It’s worse than that. There isn’t even consistent protocol/IT support within a single EU airport.”

Another put it more simply, saying: “I just miss having stamps.”

‘People are missing their flights’

Nadia, from Greater Manchester, told the Guardian in August she had made two trips to Schengen areas this summer. A trip to Tenerife in June was “quite straightforward”, but her experience in July at Frankfurt airport where she was picking up a connecting flight home, was much less so.

“The queue there was ridiculously long, and there was very limited information,” she says. “People were wandering around trying to work out where they needed to go.

“I’m very well travelled and pretty confident, but even I was slightly unsure and was thinking, is there some other queue I should be joining? There was no one nearby to check with without losing your place.”

Eventually, her passport was checked. “He didn’t actually take fingerprints then,” says Nadia, who is a solicitor. “I think the queue was so long they decided to dispense with that.

“It’s the efficiency of the system I question and the fact that individual member states’ systems do not talk to one another. They shouldn’t need to get information again if you have already gone through. It’s pretty shambolic, and I think people missing their flights because of it is just not acceptable, especially when there’s no recourse; it’s not your fault.”

Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary has repeatedly complained about EES. Speaking earlier this year, he said: “There’s a bit of Brexit in this too. Here, you voted for Brexit – f***ing join the queue.”

Rabat: Morocco said on Thursday there were “no facts” establishing its involvement in the massive migrant rush into Spain’s North African exclave of Ceuta in July.

More than 70,000 migrants entered Ceuta from Morocco on July 30 and 31 in an unprecedented, chaotic surge that left scores dead and sparked European Union infighting over the touchy issue of migration.

The Moroccan foreign ministry said there were “no facts or reports proving any involvement by the Moroccan authorities”.

The ministry added that Rabat refused to become the “scapegoat for political score-settling” in Spain.

The statement marked the kingdom’s first official reaction to a Spanish police report accusing Morocco’s security forces of “total permissiveness” when the mass crossing took place.

Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has consistently avoided blaming Morocco, noting that there was no “solid proof” that the North African country orchestrated the migrant rush.

BRUSSELS: Asylum applications to the EU dropped to a five-year-low in the first half of 2026, continuing a downward trend partly brought about by a hardening of migration policy, the bloc’s asylum agency said Thursday.

The European Union plus Switzerland and Norway (EU+) received 332,000 applications for international protection from January to June, 17 percent fewer than in the same period last year.

“This is the lowest number recorded in the first half of a year since 2021,” the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) said.

The agency attributed the decrease to the political transition in Syria, which has resulted in a massive drop in applications filed by the country’s nationals, as well as to the EU’s “efforts in cooperating with countries of origin and transit”.

Brussels has recently struck deals with Northern African countries including Tunisia and Mauritania, providing aid and investments in return for help with migration.

War in the Middle East had also not translated into a feared increase in applications from the countries affected, the EUAA said.

Afghans were the largest group of applicants, with 39,000 requests for protection, followed by Venezuelans and Bangladeshis.

Less than a third of applications processed in the first six months of the year were successful, the agency said, noting that this was due to have an impact on future requests.

Under rules that came into force in June, applicants from countries that have a recognition rate of less than 20 percent undergo an expedited procedure linked to swift deportation in case of rejection.

The same is true for applicants from countries the EU deems “safe”.

“In the first half of 2026, nearly 56 percent of applications were from citizenships meeting one or more of these criteria,” the EUAA said.

Among EU nations, France received the highest number of applications (69,000), followed by Italy (66,000), Spain (55,000) and Germany (55,000).

With 23,000 requests Greece was the country that received the most applications per capita.

Travel experts say people are confused and think they only need a passport

Thousands of UK holidaymakers are being stopped at international borders and refused entry due to confusion around visas, permits, and entry requirements, new figures have shown/ Data obtained by Confused.com found that more than 2,800 British travellers were refused entry at the US and Australian borders between 2023 and 2025. ^{2,836 Brits were denied entry across the two countries over the three-year period. More were turned away in 2025 alone (1,607) than in the 2 previous years combined (1,229).}

In the US, the 2,533 refusals related to visa or travel-documentation requirements under the visa waiver programme (VWP). In Australia, 303 Brits were refused immigration clearance between 2023 and 2025.

The US figures show a sharp rise in recent years, more than tripling from 424 refusals in 2024. Of the 2,533 Brits turned away, men made up more than two-thirds (1,745), while 18–35-year-olds were the largest age group (1,498). Nearly 100 under-18s were also refused.

Incorrect documentation was behind over half of UK refusals at the Australian border. While some destinations now offer visa-free access, many still require certain permits or specific documentation to be allowed in the country.

Travellers often assume they can rely solely on their passport or arrange permits upon arrival, when in reality, permits can take time to process or come with additional costs. This leaves them at risk of being turned away at the border.

Further research suggests the problem is part of a broader lack of awareness and confidence among travellers. Half say they aren’t confident which countries require a tourist visa for entry and 54% say the visa application process is too complicated or confusing.

Over half of travellers cite visa fees as a deterrent.

Confused.com has launched a new visa checker tool, designed to help UK travellers quickly understand the entry requirements for their destination before they travel.

Tom Vaughan, travel insurance expert at Confused.com, said: “Being turned away at border control is something no traveller expects, but it’s a real risk if you’re unsure about the entry requirements for your destination. Visa rules can be complex and vary between countries, so even small mistakes can result in people being refused entry and losing out on their holiday.

“And it’s worth knowing that if you’re refused entry, it may not be covered by standard travel insurance. Insurers may treat refusals as a preventable risk rather than an unforeseen emergency. This means you could be left to bear the cost of return flights and non-refundable bookings yourself.”

He added: “Visas are just one part of getting ready for a trip. Travellers should also check their passport validity, make sure they have appropriate travel insurance and understand what it does and doesn’t cover, and keep important documents and emergency contacts easily accessible to avoid any last-minute issues.”

Destinations with visa requirements

European Union

• Requirement: European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) permit required for short stays (up to 90 days in a 180-day period).
• Cost: €20 application fee (exempt for under 18s and over 70s).

United States of America

• Requirement: Electronic System for Travel Authorisation (ESTA) under the Visa Waiver Program.
• Cost: $40 USD.

Australia

• Requirement: eVisitor visa or Electronic Travel Authority (ETA), valid for stays up to 3 months.
• Cost: Free eVisitor visa, or a service fee of $20 AUD if applying via the ETA app.

China

• Requirement: Temporary visa-free entry allowed for short stays under a policy running until December 2026.
• Cost: N/A (Free during the temporary policy window).

India

• Requirement: e-Visa or regular paper tourist visa (passport must be stamped upon arrival).
• Cost: £25–£80 for an e-Visa (depending on duration); approximately £127 for a standard paper tourist visa.

Pakistan

• Requirement: Tourist visa required prior to arrival; Intent to travel must be submitted at least 24 hours before departure to obtain a Visa Grant Notice.
• Cost: Varies by visa type and duration (processing takes 7–10 business days).

Kenya

• Requirement: Electronic Travel Authorisation (eTA) applied for online in advance (recommended at least 2 weeks prior to departure).
• Cost: Approximately £16.